Sunteți pe pagina 1din 16

Chapter 55: Square Cup Deep Drawing using Forming Limit Diagram

55 Square Cup Deep Drawing using Forming Limit Diagram

PART 1. Explicit Forming

1098

Summary

1099

Modeling Details

Results

Introduction

1104

1101

PART 2. Implicit Spring Back

Introduction

Modeling Details

Results

1112

1108

1108

1110

Input File(s)

1112

Reference

1098

MD Demonstration Problems CHAPTER 55

Summary

Title

Chapter 55: Square Cup Deep Drawing using Forming Limit Diagram

Features

Failure criterion based on the Forming Limit Diagram

Springback: Explicit -> Implicit switching

Geometry

• Springback: Explicit -> Implicit switching Geometry Punch Clamp Sheet Die Material properties • Sheet Metal
• Springback: Explicit -> Implicit switching Geometry Punch Clamp Sheet Die Material properties • Sheet Metal

Punch

Clamp

Sheet

Die

-> Implicit switching Geometry Punch Clamp Sheet Die Material properties • Sheet Metal (aluminum sheet):

Material properties

Sheet Metal (aluminum sheet): Anisotropic Materials under Plane Stress Conditions Exx = 71.0 GPa, = 0.33 Stress constant = 0.0 MPa, Hardening modulus = 576.79 MPa Strain offset = 0.01658, Exponent for power-law hardening = 0.3593 Lankford parameters: R0 = 0.71, R45 = 0.58, R90 = 0.70

Punch, Die, and Clamp: Rigid

Analysis characteristics

Transient explicit dynamic analysis (SOL 700 explicit single precision) Nonlinear implicit static analysis (SOL 700 implicit double precision)

Boundary conditions

Explicit: Fixed boundary condition of Die and Clamp

Implicit Springback: Fixed at the center point of the plate

Element types

4-node shell elements

FE results

Stress Contour Plot, Forming Limit Diagram and more

Explicit Forming

Plot, Forming Limit Diagram and more Explicit Forming Implicit Spring Back 80.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% -30.00%

Implicit Spring Back

Limit Diagram and more Explicit Forming Implicit Spring Back 80.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% -30.00% -20.00% -10.00%
Limit Diagram and more Explicit Forming Implicit Spring Back 80.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% -30.00% -20.00% -10.00%
80.00%
80.00%
40.00% 20.00% 0.00% -30.00% -20.00% -10.00% 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% -20.00% Minor True Strain (%) Major
40.00%
20.00%
0.00%
-30.00%
-20.00%
-10.00%
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
-20.00%
Minor True Strain (%)
Major True Strain (%)

Element will fail at next step

60.00%

FLD at Mid. Surface FLD with Safety margin

True Strain (%) Major True Strain (%) Element will fail at next step 60.00% FLD at

CHAPTER 55 Square Cup Deep Drawing using Forming Limit Diagram

1099

PART 1. Explicit Forming

Introduction

This is a sheet metal forming example of a plate with anisotropic behavior that is drawn through a square hole by means of a punch. This particular example has experimental results from a verification problem of the 1993 NUMISHEET Conference held in Japan. The results are obtained at single punch depth (20 mm punch travel) for an aluminum alloy plate. The material is seen to be anisotropic in its planar directions; i.e., the material behavior is different for all directions in the plane of the sheet metal as well as in the out of plane direction. The data obtained from the NUMISHEET Conference is as follows:

Aluminum Alloy

Thickness = 0.81 mm Young’s modulus = 71 GPa Poisson’s ratio = 0.33 Density = 2700 kg/m 3 Yield stress = 135.3 MPa Stress = 576.79 * (0.01658 + p) 0.3593 MPa Lankford parameters: R 0 = 0.71, R 45 = 0.58, R 90 = 0.70 Friction coefficient = 0.162

The size of the plate modeled was 0.15 x 0.15 (in meters). No strain-rate dependency effects were included in the material data, so the metal sheet was analyzed without these effects. The dimensions of the plate, die, punch, and clamp are all given in Figure 55-1.

SOL 700 Entries Included SOL 700 TSTEPNL

DYPARAM,LSDYNA,BINARY,D3PLOT

CSPH

PSPH

EOSGRUN

SPHDEF

TIC

MATD010

PSOLIDD

MATD003

1100

MD Demonstration Problems CHAPTER 55

1100 MD Demonstration Problems CHAPTER 55 Figure 55-1 Dimensions of Plate, Die, Punch, and Clamp (in

Figure 55-1

Dimensions of Plate, Die, Punch, and Clamp (in Millimeters)

Modeling Details

CHAPTER 55 Square Cup Deep Drawing using Forming Limit Diagram

1101

Punch Clamp Sheet Die Z X Y
Punch
Clamp
Sheet
Die
Z
X
Y

Figure 55-2

The SOL 700 model is shown in Figure 55-2. The main parts in the finite element model are:

sheet metal

punch

die

clamp

SOL 700 Model (Exploded View)

Sheet Metal

The SOL 700 material model for sheet metals is a highly sophisticated model and includes full anisotropic behavior, strain-rate effects, and customized output options that are dependent on material choice. Since not all of the materials can be derived from the simplified set given by the NUMISHEET organization, most participants in the conference used an isotropic material model. In reality, the process is definitely anisotropic and effects due to these differences can be seen in the transverse direction. For materials displaying in-plane anisotropic behavior, the effect would be even more noticeable. The parameters on the MAT190 (refer to the MD Nastran Quick Reference Guide) specify planar anisotropic behavior and are as follows (for the aluminum sheet):

MATD190 elastic material properties.

Isotropic behavior was assumed in the elastic range:

Exx = 71.0 GPa = 0.33

1102

MD Demonstration Problems CHAPTER 55

Planar anisotropic yielding and isotropic hardening were assumed in the plastic range:

A = Stress constant = 0.0 MPa

B = Hardening modulus = 576.79 MPa

C = Strain offset = 0.01658

n = Exponent for power-law hardening = 0.3593

Lankford parameters:

R0 = 0.71

R45 = 0.58

R90 = 0.70

Punch, Die, and Clamp

These three components provide the constraints and driving displacement for the analysis and are modeled as rigid bodies. Contact is then specified with the metal sheet using the friction coefficient values provided. The three contact types are specified as following:

Contact between the punch and the sheet

Contact between the die and sheet

Contact between the clamp and sheet

Finally, the punch is given a scaled downward velocity providing the driving displacement for the analysis.

Input File

SOL 700,NLTRAN stop=1

SOL 700 is an executive control entry and activates an explicit nonlinear transient analysis.

Case control section is below:

DLOAD = 1 IC = 1 SPC = 1 BCONTACT = 1 TSTEPNL = 1

The bulk entry section starts:

BEGIN BULK

$

TSTEPNL 1

20

2.0E-3

$

CHAPTER 55 Square Cup Deep Drawing using Forming Limit Diagram

1103

TSTEPNL is a SOL 700 bulk data entry which describes the number of Time Steps (20) and Time Increment (2.00 ms) of the simulation. The end time is the product of the two entries. Notice here the Time Increment is only used for the first step. The actual number of Time Increments and the exact value of the Time Steps are determined by SOL 700 during the analysis. The time step is a function of the smallest element dimension during the simulation.

LSDYNA,BINARY,D3PLOT option of DYPARAM entry controls the output time steps of d3plot binary file. The result plots at every 0.002 seconds are stored in d3plot binary file.

Bulk data entries that define properties for shell elements

PSHELL1 1

1

BLT

Gauss

+

+

.81

MATD020 2

1.0

210.E9 0.3

 
 

1

4

7

The MATD020 entry defines the rigid material property. In the example, the clamp, die, and punch are modeled by the rigid materials.

MATD190 1

2.7E-4 7.1E7

0.33

2.0

576.79E3.3593

0

+

+

6.0

.71

.58

.70

.01658

+

+

2.0

77

+

+

1.0

0.0

0.0

+

+

0.0

1.0

0.0

TABLED1,77,,,,,,,,+

+,-100.0,196.67,0.0,30.,30.,45.,40.,47.,+

+,50.,45.,ENDT

The MATD190 entry defines an anisotropic material developed by Barlat and Lian (1989) for modeling sheets under plane stress conditions and with Forming Limit Diagram failure criteria. This material allows the use of the Lankford parameters for the definition of the anisotropy.

In the model, Gosh’s hardening rule is used:

Y

p

=

k   +  

0

p

n

p

The forming limit diagram is defined in by TABLED1 as shown above.

All fields are set for the coefficients of equations. See MD Nastran Quick Reference Guide for details.

SPCD2,1,RIGID,MR2,3,0,100,1.0,,+

+

TABLED1,100,,,,,,,,+

+,0.0,-1000.,0.02,-1000.,ENDT

1104

MD Demonstration Problems CHAPTER 55

The SPCD2 entry defines imposed nodal motion on a node, a set of nodes or nodes of a rigid body. The rigid punch is moving downward at 1000 m/s from 0 to 0.02 seconds.

FORCE

9999

MR3

-19.6E6

1.

The FORCE entry defines a force on the grid point as well as rigids. Since the forces on the rigid body are not yet supported by the Nastran input processor, TODYNA and ENDDYNA entries are used in conjunction with the FORCE entry to by-pass the IFP (Input File Processor) and directly access SOL 700.

BCTABLE 1

3

SLAVE

1

0.

0.

0.162

0.

0

0

0

0

0.162

SS1WAY

+

+

The BCBODY entry defines a flexible or rigid contact body in 2-D or 3-D. Although SOL 700 only supports flexible contact in BCTABLE, the rigid contact can be applied using the rigid material of contact bodies. In this example, all contact body pairs are given 0.162 static and kinetic friction coefficients. The surface-to-surface, one way contact method is used for all contact definitions.

BCBODY 1

 

DEFORM

1

$

BSURF

1

1

THRU

1600

The BCBODY entry defines a flexible or rigid contact body in 2-D and 3-D.

The BSURF entry defines a contact surface or body by element IDs. All elements with the specified IDs define a contact body.

$

GRID

1

-75.

75.

0.0

GRID

4528

-8.33333-37.0067-75.405

$

CQUAD4

1

1

1

2

43

42

CQUAD4 4468

63

4527

4273

4274

4528

Results

To verify the result of MD Nastran, the major and minor principal strains at 0.015seconds are compared with those of Numisheet and Dytran results in Figure 55-3 and Figure 55-4. Left plots of each figure were represented by

Strain

Strain

CHAPTER 55 Square Cup Deep Drawing using Forming Limit Diagram

1105

Makinouchi et al. (1993). The data in the plots were obtained from several companies which did the same test. MD Nastran gave a solution well within the spread of experimental values.

a solution well within the spread of experimental values. 2.50E-01 2.00E-01 1.50E-01 1.00E-01 5.00E-02 0.00E+00 Major

2.50E-01

2.00E-01

1.50E-01

1.00E-01

5.00E-02

0.00E+00

Major Principal Strain

0 20 40 60 80 100
0
20
40
60
80
100

Distance from Center Along Line OB

Figure 55-3

Comparison of Major Principal Strain Along Line OB (Numisheet and Dytran Results vs. MD Nastran SOL 700)

OB (Numisheet and Dytran Results vs. MD Nastran SOL 700) 0.00E+00 -5.00E-02 -1.00E-01 -1.50E-01 -2.00E-01 -2.50E-01

0.00E+00

-5.00E-02

-1.00E-01

-1.50E-01

-2.00E-01

-2.50E-01

Minor Principal Strain 0 20 40 60 80 100
Minor Principal Strain
0
20
40
60
80
100

Distance from Center Along Line OB

Figure 55-4

Comparison of Minor Principal Strain Along Line OB (Numisheet and Dytran Results vs. MD Nastran SOL 700)

120

120

1106

MD Demonstration Problems CHAPTER 55

80.00% Element will fail at next step FLD at Mid. Surface FLD with Safety margin
80.00%
Element will fail
at next step
FLD at Mid. Surface
FLD with Safety margin
60.00%
40.00%
20.00%
0.00%
-30.00%
-20.00%
-10.00%
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
Major True Strain (%)

Figure 55-5

-20.00%

Minor True Strain (%)

Forming Limit Diagram Along Line OB at 0.019 Seconds

CHAPTER 55 Square Cup Deep Drawing using Forming Limit Diagram

55 Square Cup Deep Drawing using Forming Limit Diagram t = 0.000 seconds t = 0.008

t = 0.000 seconds

Deep Drawing using Forming Limit Diagram t = 0.000 seconds t = 0.008 seconds t =

t = 0.008 seconds

Forming Limit Diagram t = 0.000 seconds t = 0.008 seconds t = 0.004 seconds t

t = 0.004 seconds

t = 0.000 seconds t = 0.008 seconds t = 0.004 seconds t = 0.012 seconds

t = 0.012 seconds

t = 0.008 seconds t = 0.004 seconds t = 0.012 seconds t = 0.016 seconds

t = 0.016 seconds

t = 0.004 seconds t = 0.012 seconds t = 0.016 seconds t = 0.020 seconds

t = 0.020 seconds

Figure 55-6

Note that the FLD diagram correctly predicts the failure of elements at t = 0.019 as shown in the stress fringe plots.

Maximum Principal Strain Contour Plots at Mid Surface at Various Times

1107

1108

MD Demonstration Problems CHAPTER 55

PART 2. Implicit Spring Back

Introduction

Springback refers to an event in which there is elastic strain recovery after the punch is removed. This deformation can alter the final desired shape significantly. In an explicit dynamic analysis, it can take some time before the workpiece comes to a rest, so the springback simulation is performed using the implicit solver to speed up this part of the analysis. Using explicit-implicit switching available in SOL 700, the residual deformations after sheet metal forming are computed and used as a pre-condition for springback analysis. Because, in this example, there was a failure at around 0.019 seconds in the sheet metal as shown in Part 1, the explicit simulation was terminated at 0.018 seconds. The initial condition, including the final stresses and deformation and the element connectivity of the explicit run are transferred to the implicit run. The analysis scheme is described below.

SOL 700 Explicit

SOL 700 Explicit

(Use SEQROUT Entry)

(Use SEQROUT Entry)

SOL 700 Explicit (Use SEQROUT Entry)
SOL 700 Explicit (Use SEQROUT Entry)
described below. SOL 700 Explicit (Use SEQROUT Entry) Generate jid.dytr.nastin SOL 700 Implicit (Include
Generate jid.dytr.nastin

Generate jid.dytr.nastin

Generate jid.dytr.nastin
Generate jid.dytr.nastin
Explicit (Use SEQROUT Entry) Generate jid.dytr.nastin SOL 700 Implicit (Include jid.dytr.nastin) (Use SPRBCK

SOL 700 Implicit

(Include jid.dytr.nastin)

(Use SPRBCK Entry)

Figure 55-7

Analysis Scheme

SOL 700 Entries Included SOL 700

MATD036

SEQROUT

SPRBCK

Modeling Details

The model of explicit run is the same as Part 1. In the implicit run, only the sheet metal is used.

Input File

Explicit Input File

BEGIN BULK

$

CHAPTER 55 Square Cup Deep Drawing using Forming Limit Diagram

1109

As mentioned above, the end time of simulation is assigned to 0.018 seconds.

SEQROUT 10

BCPROP 10

1

The SEQROUT entry generates the jid.dytr.nastin file at the end of simulation. The nastin file includes the final deformations and stresses of the assigned part. The nastin file can be used for a subsequent explicit or implicit SOL 700 run. In the example, only the result for Part 10 which includes the sheet metal is written out to the nastin file.

Implicit Input File

BEGIN BULK

$

TSTEPNL 1

10

1.8E-3

As mentioned above, the end time of simulation is assigned to 0.018 seconds.

Because all information of nodes and element connectivity is in jid.dytr.nastin file, Grid and CQUAD entries are removed in the implicit input. Only one point boundary condition at the center and SPRBCK entry are added in the input file.

Since MATD190 is not available in the implicit analysis, MATD036 is used instead of MATD190. MATD036 and MATD190 are identical material models except that FLD is supported only in MATD190.

MATD036 1

2.7E-4 7.1E7

0.33

2.0

576.79E3.3593

0

+

+

6.0

.71

.58

.70

.01658

+

+

2.0

+

+

1.0

0.0

0.0

+

+

0.0

1.0

0.0

MATD036 is only different in the failure criteria using FLD. Others are the same as MATD190 in the explicit simulations of Part 1 and 2.

 

SPRBCK

1

0.005

+

+

200

0.0

1.00E-3

+

+

2

1

100

1.0E-2 0.10

 

+

+

1

1

SPRBCK activates the implicit spring back analysis. Nonlinear with BFGS updates solver type is used in the example. See MD Nastran Quick Reference Guide for other fields.

SPC1

1

123456 841

Only one point at the center of the sheet metal is fixed to prevent singular condition in the implicit simulation.

1110

MD Demonstration Problems CHAPTER 55

Results

The springback simulation from explicit to implicit runs works fine. The results of explicit and implicit analyses are shown in Figures 55-8 to 55-10. Figure 55-8 shows the displacement contours at the start of analysis and at the end of analysis. Note that the initial deformation of the plate grids in the implicit analysis is set to zero because the final deformation of explicit analysis is applied to the initial location of grid points in the springback implicit analysis. In Figure 55-9 the initial stress condition of springback implicit analysis is perfectly coincident with the final stage of explicit analysis. The initial stress of implicit analysis causes the additional deformation in the springback implicit analysis.

:

Explicit Simulation

t = 0.000 seconds
t = 0.000 seconds
implicit analysis. : Explicit Simulation t = 0.000 seconds t = 0.018 seconds (end of explicit

t = 0.018 seconds (end of explicit run)

Because the final results are applied as the initial condition for implicit simulation, the initial deformation of implicit simulation is set to 0.

the initial deformation of implicit simulation is set to 0. Implicit Simulation Initial condition of implicit

Implicit Simulation

of implicit simulation is set to 0. Implicit Simulation Initial condition of implicit run Final result

Initial condition of implicit run

to 0. Implicit Simulation Initial condition of implicit run Final result of implicit run Figure 55-8

Final result of implicit run

Figure 55-8

Vertical (Z-direction) Displacement Contour Plot

CHAPTER 55 Square Cup Deep Drawing using Forming Limit Diagram

Explicit Simulation

t = 0.000 seconds
t = 0.000 seconds
Forming Limit Diagram Explicit Simulation t = 0.000 seconds t = 0.018 seconds (end of explicit

t = 0.018 seconds (end of explicit run)

Because the final results are applied as the initial condition of implicit simulation, the initial stress of implicit simulation is the same as the final stress of the explicit simulation.

is the same as the final stress of the explicit simulation. Implicit Simulation Initial condition of

Implicit Simulation

final stress of the explicit simulation. Implicit Simulation Initial condition of implicit run Final residual stress

Initial condition of implicit run

Implicit Simulation Initial condition of implicit run Final residual stress of implicit run Figure 55-9 The

Final residual stress of implicit run

Figure 55-9

The location of each grid point along the diagonal line of the plate at the end of the explicit and the springback analysis is plotted in Figure 55-10; the maximum difference between these curves is around 0.756 mm. The centers of the implicit and explicit sheet are positioned to have the same position as a reference, hence the largest differences tend to appear at the ends of the sheet.

von Mises Stress Contour Plot

1111

1112

MD Demonstration Problems CHAPTER 55

5 at the end of explicit run at the end of implicit run 0 -100
5
at the end of explicit run
at the end of implicit run
0
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
-5
-10
-15
Deformation to vertical direction

Figure 55-10

Distance from center

-20

Comparison of Vertical Displacements (z-direction) After Explicit and Springback Simulations Along Diagonal Line of Plate

Input File(s)

File

 

Description

MD

Nastran input file of explicit square cup deep drawing analysis using

Forming Limit Diagram.

MD

Nastran explicit input file for springback analysis.

MD

Nastran implicit input file for springback analysis

MD

Nastran stress and deformation information of explicit analysis for input

to implicit analysis

Reference

Makinouchi, A., Nakamachi, E., Onate, E., and Wagoner, R. H., “Numerical Simulation of 3-D Sheet Metal Forming Processes, Verification of Simulation with Experiment,” NUMISHEET 1993 2nd International Conference.